[EricK]

I would like to ask for people's views on 1NT with a four point range.

eg
What are the pros and cons?
Does the range (eg 10-13; 14-17; etc) make a difference?
What about 1NT rebids with a 4 card range?

Thanks

Eric

[mikestar]

I rather like 4 point ranges--you get to open 1N more often and I find the loss of accuracy vs 3 point ranges rather modest. Weakish but not ultra weak ranges are best as a 24 point game on 12-12 is ofter quite good and on 13-11 isn't too bad. So depending on what fits the rest of your system, I would say 12-15 is ideal and 11-14 or 13-16 are quite playable.

A special advantage in big club methods is that a range of 12-15 (with possible 5 card major) with a 16 point 1♣ allows your limited openings to deny a balanced hand.

[DJNeill]

Hi all,

In my experience, a 4-pt NT rebid range, while required by the system possibly, is a significant weak point. So significant that it pulls in too many random bad scores to make it worth it in my opinion. It can be alleviated by having a very good (complex) checkback structure. Also, it's not as bad when the 4-pt rebid is in a precision or kokish context so that it is VERY strong like 18-21 so it can handle some aggressive investigation and sign-off opposite a minimum or no fit.

Thanks,
Dan

[Winstonm]

I believe this was an integral part of one of the Italian's systems back in the days of the Blue Team - during the 60's. You might want to look into that - if I remember correctly, 2C was some sort of size asking bid. The four systems I believe were in play were Roman, Little Roman, Neopolitan, and Blue Team. Maybe an internet search would find information on the basis and basics of how it was used way back then.

Winston

[whereagles]

The worst pard of the 4 pt range probably isn't the invitations. It's competition.

[pbleighton]

I have played 11-14, and liked it.

I play 10-13, and love it.

I do think that there should be a reason for a wider range. Opening light is such a reason. I'm not sure, though, what a 15-18 range accomplishes. 14-17 would support light openers, etc.

Peter

[david_c]

I wonder whether part of the reason 10-13 and 11-14 seem OK is that there aren't too many unfavourable comparisons with the field. Whereas if you play 15-18, say, it's all too obvious when you lose out to the 15-17 pairs.

Personally my instinct is that a three-point range is slightly too narrow, but a four-point range is too wide. There seemed to be quite a few pairs at the BB with convention cards marked as "(14)15-17" - I like the look of that, though I haven't played it myself (at least, not with my partner knowing about it).

It does depend on the system though. In a "Standard" system I'd want my range for 1NT to be wider than the 1NT rebid, because 1m doesn't deal with weak balanced hands particularly well. Whereas in Swedish Club (to take an extreme example), the 1♣ opening describes weak balanced hands very nicely so there is less reason to upgrade them.

[luke warm]

i played 10-13 for a while and had good results with it (even vulnerable).. now it's 12-15 systemically, and i still much prefer that to 15-17

[pclayton]

When I played a mini 10-13 with a 14-16 vul (strong club based) I liked it.

When you play a mini, you are departing from the field on your 1N opener, so why not make the 1N opener as frequent as possible?

I seem to recall an article that advocated an 8-13 range in 3rd chair playing a mini after pard has passed. Maybe this was Chris Ryall's idea.

A 4 point range for a strong NT tends to be a poor idea. Pard needs to invite with 7-8 counts which will frequently get you too high.

[keylime]

Agreed with Phil wholeheartedly with regards to the 10-13 frequency.

I like the 14+ to 17- myself.

[Free]

Bridge is not all about 'points', hand evaluation is a lot more than that. You won't miss your games if you know how to evaluate...

I don't have much problems at all with 4-point ranges. With one partner I play 11-14 in 1st and 2nd seat, 12-16 (yes, 5 card range) with passed partner. Not much problems there as well.

[Free]

I know I sometimes get in 2NT which is too high, but we seldom miss games. Perhaps it's because not ALL balanced hands are opened 1NT with the 11-14 range. Perhaps it's because we have a good response structure. Perhaps it's just luck... I don't care, as long as we get good results

[3for3]

I currently play a '4' point range, but shave it by a reasonable amount on the low end, and somewhat on the high end. Thus 14-17 does not include 4333, aceless or honors doubleton or tripleton, or hands with no honors in synergy. That's a lot of 14's that don't make the cut. On the top side, only really good 17's get upgraded, typically with a good 5 card suit. So, I would describe my range as 14.4-17.7 or so, if pinned down to decimals. Playing a 4 point range without adjusting is just too wide as you will reach too many ugly 23 and 24 point games.

Danny

[awm]

At the moment I'm playing a 3.5 point range with one of my regular partners (13+ to 16). This is a good range for a lot of reasons, in particular it's strong enough that most opponents don't want to play penalty doubles over it (they rarely come up) but yet weak enough that opponents can miss a game pretty easily over it as well. Playing Keri-Garrod over this helps some, because we can invite with a major and stop in 2M; for example on Justin's pair of hands 2♠ has a bit more play than 2NT (although I admit I'd rather stop at the one-level).

Honestly I wouldn't want to increase the range to 13-16 though. We already sometimes find ourselves in very pushy games with the 3.5-point range, and competitive auctions get a bit tricky since it is harder to gauge opener's strength.

[Fluffy]

whereagles, on Nov 12 2005, 08:14 AM, said:

The worst pard of the 4 pt range probably isn't the invitations. It's competition.

Exactly, when they get rid of your invitationals you can be left with a 50% guess.

[mikestar]

Let me clarify my point: a 4 point range loses against a 3 point range when you open 1NT, for that matter a 3 point range loses against a 2 point range. But the biggests gains from any NT range are when you open 1 of a suit--here a 4 point weakish range shines, say just for example 11-14--you open 1♠ and the opponents interfere--partner knows you have either extra shape or 15 points.

[ABadPlayer]

I've played 12-15 (w/ 2S = size ask & Baron 2NT) with one of my partners for quite some time and I tend to like it. I've also played some 11-14 and 10-13 as well and those worked OK. I think it works OK with weak and mini NT when you have a good structure in place to support it, I just don't like having that broad a range with Str NT. I really don't like the idea of 15-18 at all.

~Hunter

[Chamaco]

mikestar, on Nov 12 2005, 06:54 AM, said:

A special advantage in big club methods is that a range of 12-15 (with possible 5 card major) with a 16 point 1♣ allows your limited openings to deny a balanced hand.

Ditto.
I'll add that even when playing 12-15, I'll tend to open 1NT balanaced hands with 2 Aces and a K or 11 counts with 2 Aces and some extra feature (a 5 bagger and some good spots).

The idea is to count Aces 5 and open all 13 counts computed with A= 5 hcp.